Biological Ali:He's not going to get executed. I mean, even the 20th 9/11 hijacker didn't get the death penalty, and it's not like this kid is somehow worse.

The "20th hijacker" didn't kill or hurt anyone, and turned out to be a lame Al Qaeda wannabe, not actually the intended 20th.

A better example: The bombers who hit the World Trade Center the first time in 1993 got life, despite killing 6 and injuring over 1K, not to mention trying to bring the building down and kill thousands. (Damn NY lib'ruhls.)

They will find away to weasel out of it, they always do. I remember one of my neighbors had his car totaled by a guy that crashed into it while running from the police in a stolen car. The insurance company refused to pay because they said the accident was a result of a police chase and the town is responsible.

Pretty disturbing reading how many people want him tortured and/or extrajudicially punished, or just plain wishing suffering upon him.

My opinion, as an American, is I want him afforded every right I'd expect myself as an American. Those rights and the treatment we espouse to be sacred are a significant portion of what makes our country better than many others. As well, my country claims to stand against, and has hung people for, torture/"enhanced interrogation"/increasing suffering (even through inaction). In that regard I also believe any intentional suffering caused upon someone in custody is a crime that should be punished, as is the opinion of the legal system* (*- sadly, your mileage may vary).

My opinion in regard to my faith and as a human being is that no unnecessary suffering (excluding any pain due to life-saving or life-maintaining actions) should come to him, even though I believe he likely did it (to the effect I'd have to sit out of a jury). I also believe that he shouldn't be sentenced to death unless his continued existence, no matter what actions we could possibly undertake, would still pose a threat to innocent life.

Some of you guys should be ashamed of yourselves. Whatever this persons motivations were, you wishing those kinds of things upon him, suggesting you'd be ambivalent to them happening, or wishing you could do it yourself makes you the same kind of person you believe this fellow to be. You don't think terrorists have their own justification, like you, for thinking their actions (or willingness to cause suffering) as right?

/Two Iraq deployments for a year and a half//Despite being shot at, fellow soldiers injured and killed, poisoned, threatened, insulted and knowing that if I was captured that terrible things would be done to me, 100% of any prisoners or suspects I had control of were treated like human beings. Not just because of my beliefs, but that's how decent and civilized ...

You know what?I fully understand where you are coming from, but I don't think that we can deny that humans in general have urgings towards comeuppance and revenge. After 30,000 years of basic society and existence it is apparently a part of who we are. I'm torn between wanting him to have the full protection of the law, and wanting him to receive a savage and righteous beating administered by the newly limbless runners and spectators now adjusting to the rest of their life sort of sucking. I don't think I'd have a problem if those guys were taken to the hospital or dump or morgue where their former legs and arms now reside, taking those limbs to a public square where this kid is in stocks and beating the snot out of him with the limbs they will never use again.I feel bad for those guys. I love my ,mobility, my freedom,the 45 miles a day I ride on my bike. I'm ever so grateful I can hop on a bicycle and ride a half a century and climb a few thousand feet and be at the beach in a couple hours. Where do we draw the line between civility and denying our more primal nature?

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist:If a would-be death penalty case ends up being life in prison, the nature of that crime should determine whether or not the prisoner is ever in a position again to kill, be that through supermax confinement or whatnot.

I just think there's a point where it's obvious the person who committed the crime is the one you have convicted, and when that person is so dangerous that you can't even put them in prison because they'll murder people in prison too... keeping that person in a box until they die or putting them down are essentially the same outcome. Their rights are still gone forever. I'm not advocating that everyone convicted of murder get the death penalty. But sometimes I think it's really the same thing... if not more humane than living in solitary confinement until you die.

Bashar and Asma's Infinite Playlist:While not a perfect example, would Peter Parker be more or less responsible for Uncle Ben's death if he had stabbed him with his own hands? Does the street thug not have any agency in this situation?

You could ask Peter Parker. I mean, it's the whole reason he fights crime - that he should have done the right thing instead of letting the guy go.

LordJiro:FarkedOver: gilgigamesh: People get tried on federal charges all the time. Mail fraud, wire fraud, bank robbery, drug importation, RICO... its pretty commonplace. I don't see why its a problem here.

Massachusetts is state that doesn't have the death penalty. If he is charged federally he will face the death penalty. I'd rather him not be executed.

This. The death penalty is barbaric; the government should not be in the business of revenge. Keeping him behind bars for the rest of his life should suffice.

/Probably won't happen. Pretty good odds that he gets the needle.

Agreed.We don't prove how civilized we are by government sanctioned killing of citizens.

Silverstaff:They have enough state-level charges to make sure he never sees daylight again, without touching anything labelled "terrorism" or "weapon of mass destruction". The "big gun" of going to Federal charges is that they can bring the death penalty to the table, since Massachusetts abolished it.

Yep. He'll never be a free man again. If by some miracle he's acquitted of federal charges, he'll face a whole host of state charges. They tend to stack on as much as they can. Everything from murder and attempted murder to unlawful discharge of a firearm in a public place, risking a catastrophe, using an illegal firearm during the commission of a felony, whatever else they can drum up.

FlashHarry:Great Janitor: FlashHarry: Great Janitor: Good, put him on trial, convict him, no plea bargain, and execute the son of a biatch. Make the execute as soon as possible. He doesn't deserve to live.

This isn't Russia. Is this Russia? This isn't Russia .

What does Russia have to do with anything?

it's a caddyshack quote.

my point was, your post read like you wanted a soviet-style kangaroo court in which the verdict is already known before it begins. and that here in america, everyone has the right to a fair trial.

Never saw Caddyshack.

As for the bit about the kangaroo court, his trial will be anything but. It last weeks at least. But there is no denying his guilt. And when he gets sentenced, he should be sentenced to death and it should be carried out quickly.

letrole:If you ever wonder why the motivations of the left are generally suspect in the minds of regular people in fly-over country, then have a look at this thread.Correlation does not equal causation, I suppose, but it does seem that if you supported the dweebs in the failed Occupy-X movement, your are more likely to worry about the Miranda rights of bombers.

The Southern Dandy:I worry about Mirada rights of bombers, because if they can forgo Miranda rights of bombers, then they can forgo Miranda rights for me & you, because Miranda rights are something that applies BEFORE a person has been found guilty, so even though you might say "I'll never be a bomber", if the police are allowed to circumvent your constitutional rights, you just might end up as a convicted bomber, even though you're innocent.

Would you object to torture as an interrogation method if he revealed the location of another planted bomb with a hair trigger, but only after his left hand was crushed in a vice?

sirgrim:Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb? WMDHome made bomb in a pressure cooker? Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.

How is killing 3 people, blowing off 15 limbs and wounding 180 people NOT mass destruction?

Well, my point was the term WMD which harkens from the Cold War used to only apply to Nuclear, Biological, or Chemical Weapons. The term seems to have expanded quite a bit since back in the day to now include pressure cooker bombs.

But to your point, that the number of injured or killed dictates mass destruction. Be careful with that kind of stupidity. The cretin in Aurora killed 12 and wounded 50 something with a gun, all on his own. Are guns now WMDs?

ongbok:I just feel sorry for who ever sold them their guns. Even if it was a 100% on the level legal sale from a gun shop, that shop is going to be run out of town when it is announced that they sold them the guns.

Uchiha_Cycliste:You know what?I fully understand where you are coming from, but I don't think that we can deny that humans in general have urgings towards comeuppance and revenge. After 30,000 years of basic society and existence it is apparently a part of who we are. I'm torn between wanting him to have the full protection of the law, and wanting him to receive a savage and righteous beating administered by the newly limbless runners and spectators now adjusting to the rest of their life sort of sucking. I don't think I'd have a problem if those guys were taken to the hospital or dump or morgue where their former legs and arms now reside, taking those limbs to a public square where this kid is in stocks and beating the snot out of him with the limbs they will never use again.I feel bad for those guys. I love my ,mobility, my freedom,the 45 miles a day I ride on my bike. I'm ever so grateful I can hop on a bicycle and ride a half a century and climb a few thousand feet and be at the beach in a couple hours. Where do we draw the line between civility and denying our more primal nature?

gerbilpox:Biological Ali: He's not going to get executed. I mean, even the 20th 9/11 hijacker didn't get the death penalty, and it's not like this kid is somehow worse.

The "20th hijacker" didn't kill or hurt anyone, and turned out to be a lame Al Qaeda wannabe, not actually the intended 20th.

A better example: The bombers who hit the World Trade Center the first time in 1993 got life, despite killing 6 and injuring over 1K, not to mention trying to bring the building down and kill thousands. (Damn NY lib'ruhls.)

Not being to carry out your part of the plot due to logistical issues/general failure doesn't somehow excuse the fact that you were part of the plot to begin with. Moussaoui was eligible for the death penalty, he just didn't get it (only barely; he was saved by just one juror's vote).

letrole:letrole: If you ever wonder why the motivations of the left are generally suspect in the minds of regular people in fly-over country, then have a look at this thread.Correlation does not equal causation, I suppose, but it does seem that if you supported the dweebs in the failed Occupy-X movement, your are more likely to worry about the Miranda rights of bombers.

The Southern Dandy: I worry about Mirada rights of bombers, because if they can forgo Miranda rights of bombers, then they can forgo Miranda rights for me & you, because Miranda rights are something that applies BEFORE a person has been found guilty, so even though you might say "I'll never be a bomber", if the police are allowed to circumvent your constitutional rights, you just might end up as a convicted bomber, even though you're innocent.

Would you object to torture as an interrogation method if he revealed the location of another planted bomb with a hair trigger, but only after his left hand was crushed in a vice?

Tommy Moo:Not sure, but maybe these are the only two charges the federal government has jurisdiction over, and the reckless endangerment, carjacking, gunfights with cops, trespassing, etc. can still also be charged at the state level?

So realistically, this guy killed 1, maybe 2 people. The boy and potentially the police officer. I'm all about seeing justice be done, but as the same time, why isn't there the same outrage and call for the head of the corporate suit mofo that is responsible for the negligence that killed 14 down in Texas. I don't see anyone facing the death penalty for that little dust up.

Electrify:FlashHarry: Shrugging Atlas: Charged with using a Weapon of Mass Destruction?

Fusion bomb? WMDHome made bomb in a pressure cooker? Doesn't really seem like a WMD to me.

yeah... i dunno... i mean there were mass casualties, but this would mean that just about any bomber could be charged with this. not that i'm against it, i guess, but it does seem to lump it in with someone with a dirty bomb or sarin canister or something similar.

Three people died. Not to dismiss the importance of the incident or to belittle the importance of the lives lost, but it is looking as if he would have got less jail time if he simply bought a gun and shot four people to death.

/not trying to troll here, sorry if it comes off that way//just that this may be the most pathetic "terrorist" attack in the history of terrorist attacks

A gun under the US code is considered a weapon of mass destruction for the purposes of these laws. It makes no difference if you shoot someone, blow them up, use a nuke, use poison gas or biological weapons. Furthermore, the murders themselves are rolled into the charge as proving deaths occured is an element of what is being charged in case anyone was wondering why there are only two charges with the multiple deaths and injuries.

vygramul:Kittypie070: Kibbler: A dozen rightwing pundits and countless rightwing bloggers just fell to their knees and thanked the Lord, for now they have something to rage about for the next five years.

The Southern Dandy:letrole: letrole: If you ever wonder why the motivations of the left are generally suspect in the minds of regular people in fly-over country, then have a look at this thread.Correlation does not equal causation, I suppose, but it does seem that if you supported the dweebs in the failed Occupy-X movement, your are more likely to worry about the Miranda rights of bombers.

The Southern Dandy: I worry about Mirada rights of bombers, because if they can forgo Miranda rights of bombers, then they can forgo Miranda rights for me & you, because Miranda rights are something that applies BEFORE a person has been found guilty, so even though you might say "I'll never be a bomber", if the police are allowed to circumvent your constitutional rights, you just might end up as a convicted bomber, even though you're innocent.

Would you object to torture as an interrogation method if he revealed the location of another planted bomb with a hair trigger, but only after his left hand was crushed in a vice?

No. [drops the mic]

[piclks up mic] Ooops. I read that wrong. I thought you asked if I would approve of torture. Absolutely not. We should not torture. Period. [the mic, I threw it on the ground!]

Electrify:Three people died. Not to dismiss the importance of the incident or to belittle the importance of the lives lost, but it is looking as if he would have got less jail time if he simply bought a gun and shot four people to death.

/not trying to troll here, sorry if it comes off that way//just that this may be the most pathetic "terrorist" attack in the history of terrorist attacks

Terrorist attacks don't usually have the goal of "get the highest kill count". They're more aimed at "cause the most disruption".

The pitiful ones are the ones that disrupt a small goat herding town in the mountains somewhere for an afternoon and then it's back to normal the next day because it's so routine. A major economic center was shut down for a full day because of two jokers with home made bombs. Therepercussions to how security will be handled in the future are impossible to see yet, but we weren't back to normal the next day. Hell, we're still not 'back to normal' from 2001.

Uchiha_Cycliste:You know what?I fully understand where you are coming from, but I don't think that we can deny that humans in general have urgings towards comeuppance and revenge. After 30,000 years of basic society and existence it is apparently a part of who we are. I'm torn between wanting him to have the full protection of the law, and wanting him to receive a savage and righteous beating administered by the newly limbless runners and spectators now adjusting to the rest of their life sort of sucking. I don't think I'd have a problem if those guys were taken to the hospital or dump or morgue where their former legs and arms now reside, taking those limbs to a public square where this kid is in stocks and beating the snot out of him with the limbs they will never use again.I feel bad for those guys. I love my ,mobility, my freedom,the 45 miles a day I ride on my bike. I'm ever so grateful I can hop on a bicycle and ride a half a century and climb a few thousand feet and be at the beach in a couple hours. Where do we draw the line between civility and denying our more primal nature?

I'm honestly curious to hear what you think about this viewpoint.

You're right. Underneath the thin veneer of civilization we're a bunch of tribal apes. We've had a lot more practice at being apes. It's only the decision we make every day that we're not going to give in and pound the crap out of whoever pisses us off that makes us civilized.

We have to remember that it's up to each of us to be better than that. That we are stronger as a community, that we will deal humanely with the broken examples among us and not revert to our baser selves that is what this whole enlightened civilization thing is all about. Not about being the alpha ape and being scarier than the other tribe, but about being the example that lights up the darker corners of a world that is still driven more by fear and power-seeking.

As far as the appropriate penalty, I think the best in terms of justice and safety would be to securely incarcerate him so that he has all of his days to come to grips with the horror of his acts. If he is judged unsane, he should be made whole so he can more fully appreciate the enormity of what he did, in the solitude of his remaining years.

Fubar:So realistically, this guy killed 1, maybe 2 people. The boy and potentially the police officer. I'm all about seeing justice be done, but as the same time, why isn't there the same outrage and call for the head of the corporate suit mofo that is responsible for the negligence that killed 14 down in Texas. I don't see anyone facing the death penalty for that little dust up.

letrole:letrole: If you ever wonder why the motivations of the left are generally suspect in the minds of regular people in fly-over country, then have a look at this thread.Correlation does not equal causation, I suppose, but it does seem that if you supported the dweebs in the failed Occupy-X movement, your are more likely to worry about the Miranda rights of bombers.

The Southern Dandy: I worry about Mirada rights of bombers, because if they can forgo Miranda rights of bombers, then they can forgo Miranda rights for me & you, because Miranda rights are something that applies BEFORE a person has been found guilty, so even though you might say "I'll never be a bomber", if the police are allowed to circumvent your constitutional rights, you just might end up as a convicted bomber, even though you're innocent.

Would you object to torture as an interrogation method if he revealed the location of another planted bomb with a hair trigger, but only after his left hand was crushed in a vice?

Yes.

/24 is not a farking documentary.//Nobody buys the "it's a surname' bullshiat, troll.

cameroncrazy1984:The Southern Dandy: [piclks up mic] Ooops. I read that wrong. I thought you asked if I would approve of torture. Absolutely not. We should not torture. Period. [the mic, I threw it on the ground!]

Okay that's better, you may stay.

meh... in the imaginary hypothetical where torture will reveal a bomb about to explode in time to save many lives, I think you gotta torture every time.Of course, the imaginary hypothetical doesn't exist... so we should just torture everyone all the time to make sure.

The decision to charge Tsarnaev in civilian court put an end to speculation that he would be charged as an enemy combatant, a designation sometimes used against terrorists,and the rest of the time is used against anyone who's brown and might maybe have known a terrorist three lives ago.

demaL-demaL-yeH:Uchiha_Cycliste: You know what?I fully understand where you are coming from, but I don't think that we can deny that humans in general have urgings towards comeuppance and revenge. After 30,000 years of basic society and existence it is apparently a part of who we are. I'm torn between wanting him to have the full protection of the law, and wanting him to receive a savage and righteous beating administered by the newly limbless runners and spectators now adjusting to the rest of their life sort of sucking. I don't think I'd have a problem if those guys were taken to the hospital or dump or morgue where their former legs and arms now reside, taking those limbs to a public square where this kid is in stocks and beating the snot out of him with the limbs they will never use again.I feel bad for those guys. I love my ,mobility, my freedom,the 45 miles a day I ride on my bike. I'm ever so grateful I can hop on a bicycle and ride a half a century and climb a few thousand feet and be at the beach in a couple hours. Where do we draw the line between civility and denying our more primal nature?

I'm honestly curious to hear what you think about this viewpoint.

Thomas Hobbes would like a word with you r u, uncivilized ass.FTFM

You know what, I thin kI'm gonna do my work and casually check in on fark instead of reading a several hundred year old tome that may or may not be relevant. Why don't you make an argument about why I'm wrong instead of directing me toward something that else.

Fubar:So realistically, this guy killed 1, maybe 2 people. The boy and potentially the police officer. I'm all about seeing justice be done, but as the same time, why isn't there the same outrage and call for the head of the corporate suit mofo that is responsible for the negligence that killed 14 down in Texas. I don't see anyone facing the death penalty for that little dust up.

We generally don't impose the death penalty on acts of negligence. Not even in Texas.

BafflerMeal:cretinbob: Except you know, for the video of him dropping the bomb and running.

Where is this?

They've discussed it, but because they plan on using as evidence, they haven't released it.Apparently the Federal Government and Massachusetts have been paying attention to the Zimmerman thing (Drink!!)

And that's how young Dzhokhar Tsarnaev got to become cellmates with the man know to inmates and guards alike as Rape-Assaurus Rex. My my.

Why do we as American citizens tolerate RAPE in prison?If there's a CRUEL and UNUSUAL punishment, it's to be PHYSICALLY RAPED while you're in the "custody of the government".

Seriously people.Prison rape in the USA is a casual joke... about human rights abuse!!!

I would say we tolerate it not so much because most we want to (regardless of the callous comments), but rather because it is difficult and almost impossible to stop. Prisoners do not typically bring a complaint about rape because that is against the norms of prisoners to cooperate with prison officials against other inmate. Usually it results in an attempt on the life of the inmate for cooperation. So the rapes occur and there is nothing that can be done because there is no cooperation with any investigation (assuming officials know something was going on). No one outside ignorant individuals in jest really wants crime to occur in prisons, it is just so darn hard to stop it because prisons are full of criminals who typically don't obey rules or cooperate with law enforcement to solve crimes.

It should be tried as a criminal act... unless if there is more information that we don't know yet it appears to be a criminal act by a couple of malcontents rather than an act with a political message. I guess it depends on what one's definition of terrorism is. I always imagine terrorism as something with a message, possibly backed by an organisation of some kind, targetting the public, aiming to strike fear into the population in hopes of furthering one's political cause, whatever screwball cause it might be. Its not the method of murder that makes it terrorism but the message behind it. I also figured terrorist act intends to undermine state authourity, therefore lessening the legitimacy of a states domestic power (since it can't protect its own people) and leading to increased domestic chaos, especially as the state resorts to more extreme measures to stop terrorism and therefore cracks down on civil liberties in the name of security, thus fuelling discontent.

I just don't see that kind of motivation here. Charge him with murder and bodily harm or whatever. Life imprisonment or death penalty, whatever the laws are. :Let's not bring terrorism into the equation. I'm sick of hearing oh noes islams are terrorists! . What new draconian thing are they going to introduce to prevent this kind of attack? The thing is, there are always going to be people who are murderous and discontented. Some people might be simply drawn to the notoriety presented by such a large attack. This attack seems closer to a columbine type thing rather than a "terrorist" attack. Just the method of murder is different. Would we be talking about terrorism if they had just used a gun to shoot randomly into a crowd, potentially killing even more people?

1st degree murder and take away the notoriety that comes with being labelled a terrorist.

thurstonxhowell:Treygreen13: thurstonxhowell: Treygreen13: we must also consider the innocent blood on our hands if even one person is killed by someone who should have been put to death, but wasn't.

Maybe you do. I don't.

Well we'll have to agree to disagree. There are plenty of stories of people getting out of prison and killing again. We're responsible (as a society) for that as well.

Again, no, we're not. We are absolutely not responsible for the future misdeeds of every person we could have killed. That's ridiculous.

You should tell that to the victims who were killed by murderers released from prison who killed again. There has to be more to our justice system than "you did your time, get out there and start murdering again." If that means more life sentences and more psychoanalysis of people who have "served their time" before they're released, I'm ok with that too.

Personally, I will never lose a wink of sleep worrying about whether or not the obviously guilty admitted murderers feel distressed as they are lethally injected. If that really bothers you, then campaign against the death penalty all you want.